and many more benefits!

Find us on Facebook

GMAT Club Timer Informer

Hi GMATClubber!

Thank you for using the timer!
We noticed you are actually not timing your practice. Click the START button first next time you use the timer.
There are many benefits to timing your practice, including:

"Nuclear weapons are potentially more devastating than any other weapon in human history. We must stop pointing the nuclear gun at our own heads. The best way to lower the threat of nuclear war is for the nuclear capable nations, including the U.S., to lead by example and dismantle their own nuclear arsenals."

Discuss the extent to which you agree or disagree with the position stated above. Support your viewpoint using reasons and examples from your own experience, observations, or reading.

YOUR RESPONSE:The contentious issue of whether the nuclear capable nations should dismantle and destroy their nuclear arsenal can be argued upon perpetually. From one point of view, the nuclear weapons can be viewed as the nation's strongest weapon of self-defense as it can help the nation in situations of international wars. On the contrary, it can be argued that the nuclear weapons are the biggest thread to the world peace. I also firmly support the latter that the nuclear weapons are threat to the world peace and they should be destroyed. In this essay, I will present with a few compelling arguments and examples to illustrate my position.

First, we can look at the example from the world history. The nuclear attack on two of the cities of Japan during the second world war devastated Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Even after over half a century past that event, these countries are suffering from the effects of the nuclear effect. Now considering the present situation when a lot of nations are in possession of the nuclear arsenal, an international war of such magnitude can devastate the whole world. Nuclear weapons have the capability of permanently harming the human civilization. Clearly, this attack can wipe off the human civilization from a large piece of the world.

Second, the possession of nuclear arsenal by certain nations also compels other nations to follow the league and spend money and manpower in developing nuclear weapons. This, in turn, increases the probability of a global war in future. Another example to illustrate this could be the cold war which occurred between United States and Russia. This increased the hostility among the nations to such extend that at certain point the war appeared inevitable.

In addition, it is the responsibility of stronger nuclear capable nations such as US to drive the surrendering and dismantling of the possessed nuclear arsenal and compel other nations to do the same. Although this task to dispose off the nuclear arsenal in mutually agreed fashion is very tedious, it has definitive advantages for the world peace and it will help the future human generations not just to survive but flourish.

But while destroying the nuclear weapons possessed by the nations, we must also take in account that there are some politically unstable nations like Pakistan and Afghanistan which might not cooperate to this movement. It is, therefore, the responsibility of the of stronger nations to drive this movement effectively.

In conclusion, in order to save the human civilization from a global nuclear war in future, the nuclear capable nations need to drive the dismantling of the nuclear weapons by all nations. While there are certain concerns with this approach, it does have a long lasting effect on the generations to come.

AWA ESSAYS: Analyze ArgumentESSAY QUESTION:

The following appeared in an article in a human resources magazine:

"Six months ago, in an experiment aimed at boosting worker productivity, Company Z started providing free gourmet lunches to its employees. The Company hoped that these office lunches would encourage employees to remain in the building during lunch-hour and motivate employees to work harder throughout the day. A survey found that soon after the lunch program was implemented, the average number of hours worked by most Company Z employees increased dramatically. During this same period, the Company's profits also increased substantially. Thus, it is safe to say that the lunch program was a huge success and that Company Z should make the program permanent."

Discuss how well reasoned you find this argument. Point out flaws in the argument's logic and analyze the argument's underlying assumptions. In addition, evaluate how supporting evidence is used and what evidence might counter the argument's conclusion. You may also discuss what additional evidence could be used to strengthen the argument or what changes would make the argument more logically sound.

YOUR RESPONSE:The argument presented here gives details of an experiment conducted by Company Z to improve the productivity. As per the experiment free gourmet lunches were provided by the company to its employees with the aim of improving their productivity. In the end the author claims, on the basis of the survey results, that the free lunch program was successful. Though the his claim may have some merit, the author gives a poorly reasoned argument, based on the unsubstantiated premises and assumptions, and based solely on the information provided in the argument, we cannot accept the author's claim.

The primary issue with the argument's claim is the unsubstantiated premises. The author claims that the company hopes that free lunches would motivate employees to work hard, but he fails to mention a logical reasoning to support this claim. Clearly, the author fails to mention whether there is any proper link between the motivation of employees and the free lunch. Do employees really see free lunches as an added advantage that motivates them? Moreover, the argument fails to provide a proper link between the increased working hours of employees with the improved profits. What if the employees stayed in office only for free meals and didn't do any productive work?

In addition, the author makes some assumptions that remain unproven. For example, the author states that the productivity and profits have increased over the time when free lunch program was implemented. But he fails to prove that the only reason for the improved profits and increased number of average working hours by employees is the free lunch program. It is possible that there were some other incentives or benefits that the company provided which compelled the employees to stay in office premises. What if a new policy is introduced which mandates the employees to stay in office for a minimum number of hours.

Although, the argument is based on unsupported premises and assumptions, that is not to say that the entire argument is baseless. The author can add further details to his argument to strengthen it. For example, if the author substantiates his claims by a survey conducted by taking feedback from employees which states that the free lunch is truly one of the compelling reasons that motivates them, it could nicely bolster the conclusion.

In conclusion, the argument provided by the author is logically flawed and is based on unsupported premises and assumption. If the author really wants to change the reader's mind, he should restructure his argument, provide evidence to support the premises and explicate the assumptions. Without these changes, the argument will not be well received by the readers.

--I think this time I have definitely improved over the last time. I read some templates and patterns for the essays and adapted those ideas this time.Generously I could give myself a 5/6 for these essays. Looking for some experts' comments!

The argument is suggesting that by remaining in the building the employees are able to increase the productivity and profits to the company. The argument is confusing correlation with causation.

The argument is based on weak cause and effect mechanism.

The argument assumes that external factors affecting the conclusion are zero or nullified.

Probably the company is growing because of good business or hiring - hence the syrvey cannot be taken as a sufficient cause for the claim that the lunch program itself was the cause of the effect.

In order to fix the argument the human resources should investigate the causes that lead to the increase in the productivity of the employees and therefore increased profits. Absent evidence to substantiate the claim, the argument is left unsupported.

Thanks for the feedback!!Although I am not targeting a 6 pointer in the essays, it is satisfying to know that I am on the right track

gmat1220 wrote:

First essay - 5.5/6Second essay - 5/6

Following are my additions. All the best !

The argument is suggesting that by remaining in the building the employees are able to increase the productivity and profits to the company. The argument is confusing correlation with causation.

The argument is based on weak cause and effect mechanism.

The argument assumes that external factors affecting the conclusion are zero or nullified.

Probably the company is growing because of good business or hiring - hence the syrvey cannot be taken as a sufficient cause for the claim that the lunch program itself was the cause of the effect.

In order to fix the argument the human resources should investigate the causes that lead to the increase in the productivity of the employees and therefore increased profits. Absent evidence to substantiate the claim, the argument is left unsupported.